User talk:Joshua Jonathan

"The avalanche was down, the hillside swept bare behind it; the last echoes died on the white slopes; the new mount glittered and lay still in the silent valley." Evelyn Waugh, Brideshead Revisited

Archives: Talk, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, list

en:User:Joshua Jonathan/Buddha/message

May 2020

Please do not undo my edits without consensus WP:CONS while the discussion is in progress on talk page as you have done previously on [Vedas Talk Page]. You have previously engaged in forcefully moving my edits with several references to notes without my consent [Vedas#Arbitrary_break_#2] diff [[1]]. I have asked for a third opinion on your undoing my edits. I will have to raise this with WP:ANI. Jaykul72 (talk) 11:34, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Go ahead; be aware of my explanation at Talk:Vedas#nodding head a vedic practice?: you did a mass-revert diff diff, remove a lot of indo from WP:RS because you object to three words from another WP:RS. Purely disruptive editing. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:42, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

This is not disruptive editing, it is undoing a forceful edit while the discussion is on in the talk page diff [[2]] Jaykul72 (talk) 11:47, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

It is: you removed a lot of other info from WP:RS; that's disruptive. You could have sufficed with adding a {{disputed}} tag for those specific three words - which, again, are from WP:RS. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 11:49, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Whether the WP:RS is fringe WP:FRINGE and is being provided undue weight WP:UNDUE was under discussion on talk page. While in your previous forceful movement of my edits diff [[3]], again without waiting for consensus WP:CONS unilaterally you chose to move my edits to notes section [Rath] & [I-Tsing], in response to this when I do undoing of your edits, you call them WP:DISRUPTIVE? Jaykul72 (talk) 11:56, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Yes, copy-editing content is quite different from removing a large amount of sourced info. I explained why I moved this info into notes: Rath's comment on the mnemotic devices is a repetition; Staal's comment is unnecesary, just like the full I-Tsing quote. You, as far as I can tell, moved the specific info on "nodding the head" to a note because you object to it. I don't object to Rath and I-Tsing an sich; I object to the undue weight they are given. I have even added additional information on the mnemonic devices, including physical movements, thereby providing further context, and provided a link to Shiksha; that's usefull.

Remember that Wikipedia presents and summarizes what WP:RS state. If you dispute the factual accuracy of WP:RS, you have to do better than invoking WP:FRINGE. At least you could provide some sources which show that "nodding the head" as a support of memorisation is at odds with the mainstream view on this topic. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:09, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Whether a good faith edit is unnecessary or repetition is under the discussion, was there a consensus on it in the talk page before you chose to forcefully move them to notes? Jaykul72 (talk) 12:15, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Did you explain your objections? See WP:UNDUE, WP:OWN, and WP:QUOTEFARM. You're missing opportunities to improve this article, instead insisting on adding quotes which seem to reinforce the unique status of the Vedas. That's not what Wikipedia is for.

And the way Rath and I-Tsing are presented in this article is also not an excuse to remove large amounts of sourced info; again, there is a difference between copy-editing an article to improve it, and removing large amounts of info from WP:RS because you personally disagree with three words from another WP:RS. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 12:21, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Requesting expansion and update edit support

Hi,

Season's greetings

I am looking for proactive expansion and update support/input help the following (So far neglected but important topic) articles, if possible. Even if you feel focus area bit different still contribution of few line may help bring in some different perspective and also help Wikipedia goal of neutrality. If you can't spare time but if you know any good references you can note those on talk pages.

• Islamic advice literature

Your user ID was selected randomly (for sake of neutrality) from related other articles changes list related to Literature.

Thanks, warm regards and greetings

Bookku (talk) 10:19, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Resurrection appearances template

Hi. I don't want to come across as overly critical, but I'm puzzled by your decision to only link directly Template:Resurrection appearances (to link to a template is unusual itself) rather than transclude it in an article. And then, although it can only be viewed by visiting the template page, and it is the only item on the page, you have chosen to collapse it? You are hiding the template and ensuring that almost nobody actually sees it (it receives on average only 7 views a day); that is a shame because it's a comprehensive informative table. If you want to have it collapsed then perhaps you can include it in Post-resurrection appearances of Jesus? I'm not going to revert your edit.--Hazhk (talk) 07:08, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

To be continued at Template talk:Resurrection appearances#Collapsible table. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 07:14, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your offer to help.... can you guide me on this issue?

As you may recall, I am new to Wikipedia. Still figuring things out. My edit ( 12:19, 12 June 2020 diff hist +1,894‎ Gospel of Mark ‎ →‎Setting: Adding An analysis of the socio-theological context at the time of Mark's writing current) seems to have disappeared. Seemingly, without a trace. I don't see any indication that it was reversed. I did not receive any notification. Obviously, I am missing something. Can you clarify this for me Thanks A19470822 (talk)

@A19470822: User:Epinoia explained it to you on your talkpage. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 16:40, 12 June 2020 (UTC)

Sorry

I just can't follow all of that and am too unfamiliar with the subject. Doug Weller talk 13:09, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Weller: never mind, I understand. Joshua Jonathan -Let's talk! 14:46, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Rigvedic quotes on homosexuality

Would you mind taking a look at the recent editing history of Hinduism and LGBT topics and Homosexuality in India, and giving your thoughts? Further context can be found on my talk page - essentially, there is text asserting that a certain phrase occurs in the text of the Rigveda, which is an entirely spurious claim, and attributed to sources that are not competent to comment. The text in question appears nowhere in the actual text of the Rigveda, as is easily established by searching through an online database like Titus. It also appears nowhere in any of the academic sources on the Rig Veda itself, including the authoritative translation and associated commentary recently published by Jamison & Brereton. The citations are mostly to newspapers which appear to be uncritically repeating this factoid without further citation, and it has been picked up by one or two academic sources that are not on the Rig Veda or Sanskrit, and which do not themselves source it. I'm not sure what the appropriate solution to this is. Hölderlin2019 (talk) 11:03, 15 June 2020 (UTC)